Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 197 (UTT)

STATE OF UTTARAKHAND v. RAGHUVIR SINGH NEGI

2015-04-03

ALOK SINGH, SERVESH KUMAR GUPTA

body2015
JUDGMENT : Hon’ble Alok Singh, J. (Oral) For the reasons stated in the application, delay in filing the appeal is condoned. CLMA No. 14507 of 2014 stands disposed of accordingly. 2. Present appeal is filed assailing the judgment and order dated 05.08.2014, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court whereby Writ Petition No. 1784 (S/S) of 2013, Raghuvir Singn Negi Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others, was allowed issuing the mandamus that petitioner shall be treated to be regular on the post and he shall be given all the benefits which are given to the Lecturers in the provincialsed College. Further, commanding the State Authorities to release the salary of the petitioner forthwith alongwith interest @ 7% p.a. on the accumulated arrears. 3. Brief facts of the present case, inter alia, are that earlier Janta Inter College, Sikko, Pauri Garhwal was private inter college, however under the grant-in-aid; petitioner who was M.A. (English) was appointed purely on adhoc basis as Lecturer (English) in the year 1989; services of the petitioner as Lecturer in English were regularized on 23.04.1994; State Government has taken policy decision to provincialise Janta Inter College Sikko, Pauri Garhwal and, ultimately, vide order dated 1st October, 2012, annexure No. 18 to the writ petiton, Janta Inter College was provincialised; while provincialising the Janta Inter College, one post of Principal, six post of Lecturers, 8 post of Assistant Teachers, one post of Senior Assistant Clerk, two posts of 4th Class employees were sanctioned; as per conditioin No. 5 of the Government Order dated 1st October, 2012, annexrue No. 18 to the writ petiton, on provincialising the Janta Inter Colelge, only those working staff, who were having requisite minimum qualification for the posts would be deemed having been temporary appointed against the sanctioned post and they would be regularized and absorbed in the provincialised college only when they would be declared eligible either by the competent officer or by the Public Servcie Commission; vide order dated 25th January, 2014, annexure No. 21 to the writ petiton, direction was issued that in view of G.O. dated 23.01.2014, those Lectureres who were not having B.Ed degree, one of the requisite minimum qualification to hold the post of Lecturer had to obtain the B.Ed. degree within three years from the date of notification dated 25th January, 2014. degree within three years from the date of notification dated 25th January, 2014. G.O. dated 25.01.2014 furhter stipulates that increments shall be payable only after obtaining the B.Ed. degree. 4. Writ petitioner, respondent herein, preferred Writ Petition No. 1784 of 2013 (S/S), Raghuvir Singh Negi Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others before this Court assailing the order dated 25th January, 2014, whereby all the lecturers were required to obtain B.Ed. degree within three years and further seeking writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to release the arrears of salary w.e.f. 01.10.2012. 5. Learned Single Judge of this Court, vide impugned judgment, was pleased to observe that on the the date of appointment of the petitioner, B.Ed. degree was not requisite qualification to hold the post of Lecturer in English nor B.Ed. was one of the requisite qualificatioin in the year 1994 when services of the petitioner was regularized by the Janta Inter College, private inter college, although grant-in-aid, therefore, after provincilisation of the College, State Government cannot insisit the petitioner to obtain B.Ed. degree within three years. Consequently, petitioner should be paid salary from the date provincilisation of the College till date alongwith interest @ 7% per annum. Feeling aggrieved, State Government has preferred present appeal. 6. We have heard Mr. A.K. Joshi, Addl. C.S.C. for the appellants/State and Mr. I.D. Paliwal, learned counsel for the writ petitioner/ respondent herein. 7. There is no dispute that petitioner was appointed as Lecturer English in grant-in-aid private Inter College initially on ad-hoc basis in the year 1989 and at that time petitioner was M.A. English; on 23.04.1994, services of the petitioner were regularized by the grant-in-aid private college. 8. This is also not in dispute that State Government vide Notification/Government Order dated 1st October, 2012, annexure No. 18 to the writ petition, was pleased to provincialise Janta Inter College, Sikko, Pauri Garhwal and 25 various posts were sanctioned therein as mentioned in annexure No. 18 to the writ petiton, with the clear stipulation mentioned in Clause 5 thereof that only those staff would be treated to be temporary appointed on the date of provincialisation who were having requisite minimum qualification for the post on the date of provincialisation and they would be confirmed / absorbed in College only when their cases would be recommended by the Competent Officer or by the Public Service Commission. 9. 9. Undisputeldy, Uttarakhand State Subordinate Education (Lecturer Cadre) Service Rules, 2008 came into force w.e.f. 30th January, 2008. As per Rules of 2008, for the post of Lecturer English, minimum requisite qualification is post graduatioin degree alongwith L.T. Diploma from any recognized College or B.Ed. from any recogninsed University. 10. Learned counsel for the parties do not dispute that neither in the G.O. dated 01.10.2012 whereby college was provincialised nor in the Rules of 2008, Government has any power to grant/extend relaxation in the minimum requisite qualification of the Lecturer. 11. In other words, when the College, in question, was provincialised on 1st October, 2012, as per Rule 2008, minimum requisite qualification for the post of Lecturer (English) was post graduation with L.T. Diploma from any recognized College or B.Ed. degree from any recognized University. However, petitioner was neither having L.T. Diploma nor having B.Ed. degree on the date of provincialisation of the College, i.e. 1st October, 2012. Therefore, as per Clause 5 of the notification/Government Order dated 1st October, 2012, petitioner was not entitled to be considered as temporary appointee against the sanctioned post. 12. We have no hesitation to hold that despite there being no provision either in the Notification dated 1st October, 2012 provincialising the college, in question, nor in the Rules of 2008 to relax any requisite minimum qualification, Government has issued G.O. dated 23rd/25th January, 2014 making provision that whosoever is not having requisite qualification of B.Ed. degree may obtain the same within next three years failing which, increments shall not be paid. The net result of G.O. dated 23rd/25 January, 2014 would be that those Lecturers, who were not having minimum requisite qualification, if fail to obtain the same within three years shall continue to take classes, however, shall not be paid increment. This cannot be permitted in view of Clause (5) of the G.O. dated 01.10.2012 read with Rules 2008. Therefore, we are of the considered view that Government Order dated 23rd /25th January, 2014 were against the Clause (5) of the Notification/Government Order dated 1st October, 2012 and Rules of 2008. 13. There is another aspect of the matter. Petitioner himsels is assailing the Government Order dated 23rd/25th January, 2014 whereby provision was made to obtain B.Ed. degree within three years. 13. There is another aspect of the matter. Petitioner himsels is assailing the Government Order dated 23rd/25th January, 2014 whereby provision was made to obtain B.Ed. degree within three years. Since we have already held that impugned Government Order dated 23rd/25th January, 2014 are without jurisdiction, therefore, we have to accept the relief (a) of the petitioner. Consequently, we hereby quash the Government Orders dated 23rd and 25th January, 2014. Since petitioner was not having B.Ed. degree on the date of provincialisation of the College, i.e. 1st October, 2012, therefore, petitioner ought not to have been given appointment even as temporary. Moreover, since petitioner is not having requisite qualification of L.T. Diploma or B.Ed. degree, therefore, his name was never recommended to be absorbed in the provincialised college by the Competent Authority or Public Service Commision. Applying the principle “whosoever gets entry from the back door, must be shown the same door to go out”, therefore, it is held that petitioner is not entitled either temporary post or absorption or any salary. 14. Consequenlty, appeal is allowed. Impugned judgment is set aside and writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. However, no cost. 15. CLMA No. 14508 of 2014, IA No. 1047 of 2015 and CLMA No. 2752 of 2015 also stand disposed of accordingly.